Rape Victims have the Right to be Heard... Unless its against my Narrative!

I don't speak for the Progressive movement so I'm not going to bother trying to answer questions as if I do.

My point is that blaming these things on "Progressives" with a general accusation like that doesn't make much sense. Who are you talking about
specifically when you use "Progressives". Because that term is used by many to mean just about anyone or everyone without any attempt to distinguish
who's who.

As for why some of them act irrational I'd say it's because so many others are acting irrational too that it sort of fuels itself. We have members in
congress who talk about "Legitimate Rape" or still trying to blame the victim when it comes to rape or saying that a husband can't rape his wife.
Things like that make others angry and irrational too in fighting their obvious ignorance of making such statements. So you have irrational people on
all sides fueling the opposite side is my guess.

Then you have a justice system which seems to favor certain members of society as well. Young white college men raping a woman behind a dumpster and
getting off with a light sentence where a minority wouldn't be so lucky. This again fuels one side to act irrational toward the other when seeing an
unfair justice system favor privileged people over those less influential.

We can site examples all day, but over time the general population does in fact notice an unequal system, especially in justice and rightfully so. We
all know that the system is in favor of wealth and class over others even though it's not supposed to be that way. This ends up reaching a point
where it causes people to lash out against an enemy that they can't always identify but seems to permeate every aspect of their lives often times just
causing more harm than good but it's all they have.

I don't speak for the Progressive movement so I'm not going to bother trying to answer questions as if I do.

My point is that blaming these things on "Progressives" with a general accusation like that doesn't make much sense. Who are you talking about
specifically when you use "Progressives". Because that term is used by many to mean just about anyone or everyone without any attempt to distinguish
who's who.

This is a very fair point. I hate labels, but don't know how to communicate effectively without them. Let me try to say who I mean.

By progressives I mean people that view the world in terms of oppressing classes and oppressed classes, and view all fact through that lens.

This would include Hillary, Obama, most Democratic politicians of national renown (though not all), many main stream media people such as those at
CNN, MSNBC, New York Times, Huff Post, Merkel and her party, most of the leaders in the EU, most of the people in charge of US academia, people that
believe in the patriarchy or that whiteness is evil, and many more people.

It would just be difficult to list all of those people out every time i was referencing them, so I use the word progressive. If you consider yourself
a progressive but don't fit into my definition, I am extremely sorry.

As for why some of them act irrational I'd say it's because so many others are acting irrational too that it sort of fuels itself. We have
members in congress who talk about "Legitimate Rape" or still trying to blame the victim when it comes to rape or saying that a husband can't rape his
wife. Things like that make others angry and irrational too in fighting their obvious ignorance of making such statements. So you have irrational
people on all sides fueling the opposite side is my guess.

No doubt there are bad people on all sides. But this seems to be a main platform of many people in the Democratic party, and in academia and media
and so on.

A conservative that believes a husband can't rape a wife is fringe, and would be shouted down by most main stream conservatives (myself included).

Yet a progressive that feels the US is a rape culture but thinks pointing out Islamic grooming is racist and a hoax or at least not worth mentioning
seems to be almost the norm with this group.

Then you have a justice system which seems to favor certain members of society as well. Young white college men raping a woman behind a
dumpster and getting off with a light sentence where a minority wouldn't be so lucky. This again fuels one side to act irrational toward the other
when seeing an unfair justice system favor privileged people over those less influential.

You have no evidence of this racial claim. Jamison Winston was a black college athlete accused of rape, he got off scott free. As did Nate Parker.
Where was the outrage over this by progressives?

Should the kid you are talking about git a harsher sentence? I don't know all of the facts of the case, but it seems to me he got off light because
the laws were written stupidly and because she wasn't conscious she couldn't say no. Where is your proof a black person would not have been able to
use this defense?

In fact, how much do you know of this case. Did you read all of the transcripts, or are you just taking the medias word for it?

We can site examples all day, but over time the general population does in fact notice an unequal system, especially in justice and rightfully
so. We all know that the system is in favor of wealth and class over others even though it's not supposed to be that way. This ends up reaching a
point where it causes people to lash out against an enemy that they can't always identify but seems to permeate every aspect of their lives often
times just causing more harm than good but it's all they have.

This system is unequal in many regards. Those that can afford a better defense, or those that have the right connections are heavily favored. But
this doesn't give people the right to lump all sorts of categories in as favored.

For example, it is a statistical fat that men are charged more often than women, and receive far harsher sentences than women for the same crime. Yet
women are supposed to be victims of the system according to progressives. As long as we go on "feelings" instead of facts, nothing will ever
change.

Again, my problem is these progressives that say things like we must always here out sexual assault victims because women are victims, but are willing
to be vile and hateful to women that have been assaulted that challenge their world view of who is the oppressed.

And again, they have the audacity to claim they are morally superior to all those that disagree with them.

I'm confused with your problem of "Hearing from the victims". Are you saying that we should ignore people who are victims of a crime??? Or alleged
victims of a crime even???

That is where you're losing me I guess. It's also part of the problem I think too. The idea that we should dismiss what others have to say while we
aren't even in their position to me is taking a false position of authority and judgement.

Going too far to have Safe Spaces in public areas and some of the other PC garbage is a bit much I agree. But regardless of what Bill O'reily might
say there is still racial issues happening. He just refuses to see them. Or in this case perhaps hearing them is more to the point. Are there fake
victims too, of course, but that doesn't mean they all are invalid and to assume they are without hearing them out isn't going to help anything.
Because that is exactly why so many are continuing to yell with whatever voice they can to be heard. Because too many people refuse to listen
honestly to what is being said. They think they know it all already because they've experienced something in their life which may be different. But
not everyone has the same experiences and if we're to listen to one side we should also listen to the other because they both have merit.

1400 girls allowed to be sexually assaulted for 16 years in Rotherham England because progressive said it would be racist to accuse Muslims of
this?

Actually it was the police that kept it hush hush not the "progressives".

& British Muslims were appalled when it came to light.

The Labour Party, in particular, is mired in shame over “cultural sensitivity” in Rotherham. Especially, cynics might point out, a
sensitivity to the culture of Muslims whose votes they don’t want to lose. Denis MacShane, MP for Rotherham from 1994 to 2012, actually admitted to
the BBC’s World At One that “there was a culture of not wanting to rock the multicultural community boat, if I may put it like that. Perhaps, yes,
as a true Guardian reader and liberal Leftie, I suppose I didn’t want to raise that too hard.” Much better to hang on to your impeccable liberal
credentials than save a few girls from being raped, eh, Denis?

Equally horrifying is the suggestion that certain Pakistani councillors asked social workers to reveal the addresses of the shelters where some of the
abused girls were hiding. The former deputy leader of the council, Jahangir Akhtar, is accused of “ignoring a politically inconvenient truth” by
insisting there was not a deep-rooted problem of Pakistani-heritage perpetrators targeting young white girls. The inquiry was told that influential
Pakistani councillors acted as “barriers to communication” on grooming issues.

Front-line youth workers who submitted reports in 2002, 2003 and 2006 expressing their alarm at the scale of the child sex-offending say the town hall
told them to keep quiet about the ethnicity of the perpetrators in the interests of “community cohesion”.

Fear of appearing racist trumped fears of more children being abused. Not only were negligent officials not prosecuted, they prospered. Shaun Wright,
a former Labour councillor who was in charge of Rotherham children’s services during a five-year period when a blind eye was turned to the worst
case of mass child abuse in British history, is now South Yorkshire’s Police and Crime Commissioner. Oh, Jonathan Swift, thou shouldst be writing at
this hour!

Could not the police have been progressive, or controlled by progressive leaders?

Read that article, it is disgusting, and shows how all of the politicians didn't want to rock the multicultural boat, and didn't want to appear
racist. They didn't want the police to investigate.

"Leftie" politicians admitting they didn't want to lose votes by going against multi culturalism. Its all there for you te read, plain as day.

We know what happened, just like in Germany. The progressive powers that demanded that these crimes be covered up and sacrificed on the altar of
multi culturalism.

This still goes on by the way, and yet not a peep out of Obama, Hillary, or a litanty of other people that claim to champion womens rights in the US.
Instead we have The Guardians US branch, one of the papers that reported on this and the Germany fiasco, calling sexual assault victims hoaxers.

Do you admit this is disgusting?

As for Muslims being furious, I am sure many were. Here is a great link www.bbc.com...

However, that source also says that they had to suppress evidence of racial proclivities towards these rapes out of fears of racism. Ironically the
Muslims in this article seem to be the only ones saying to stop these rapes regardless of racial implications, it is the progressive white leaders
that are tip toeing because of multiculturalism.

Not all Muslims agreed though, here is another source.

Fury as Islamic group orders Muslims in Rotherham to BOYCOTT police over child sex scandal

I'm confused with your problem of "Hearing from the victims". Are you saying that we should ignore people who are victims of a crime??? Or alleged
victims of a crime even???

That is where you're losing me I guess. It's also part of the problem I think too. The idea that we should dismiss what others have to say while we
aren't even in their position to me is taking a false position of authority and judgement.

No I am not saying that. I said in a previous post, I will take any person who claims to be the victim of sexual assault seriously, unless a lot of
evidence arises that it may not be the case. I will also allow the judicial system to allow the accused to be innocent until proven guilty, but that
doesn't mean we should discredit the victim.

Thats it. I don't care the ethnicty or age or sex or political ideology or the religion or the wealth of the accuser or the accused. None of that
matters to me.

This is what angers me about the progressives that I am talking about. They are less interested in the facts of a case, and more interested in the
demographics and beliefs of the accuser and accused.

So Tawana Brawley, a black girl that accused white police officers of raping her, even though that ha been proven to be 100% false, some progressives
still believe her today, or at least excuse her or ignore the hucksters like Al Sharpton that knowingly spread that lie, because it fits their
narrative.

But Ms. Waters from my first post that wrote about how she was attacked by Muslim migrants in Europe, and wrote of the mass sexual assaults that
happened to women there, she is called a hoaxer and racist, despite the fact that we know these attacks happen. Or she is ignored altogether, because
Muslims are oppressed, and it doesn't fit the narrative..

Going too far to have Safe Spaces in public areas and some of the other PC garbage is a bit much I agree. But regardless of what Bill O'reily
might say there is still racial issues happening. He just refuses to see them. Or in this case perhaps hearing them is more to the point. Are there
fake victims too, of course, but that doesn't mean they all are invalid and to assume they are without hearing them out isn't going to help anything.
Because that is exactly why so many are continuing to yell with whatever voice they can to be heard. Because too many people refuse to listen
honestly to what is being said. They think they know it all already because they've experienced something in their life which may be different. But
not everyone has the same experiences and if we're to listen to one side we should also listen to the other because they both have merit.

Of course their are racial and gender and sexual and religious etc. issues in this country. The problem is they are not as bad as the progressive
would have you believe, and definitely not as simplistic.

Again take womens issues. I showed on a previous post, if you were to listen to Hillary or Obama or Lena Dunham or the New York Times, you would
think this country is terrible for women.

Yet they are leading in education, are safer than ever, have superior parental control (as in get custody and such way more), younger women get paid
more than men, etc. Yet you wouldn't know any of that if you didn't research it, you would assume "Women get 77 cents to the dollar and live in fear
of a rape culture". The issue is complicated, some times men benefit, sometimes women.

The same is true of race, religion, etc. Progressive love these identity politics where we just put people into groups and expect them to behave as
just a member of that group.

Whites, bad, blacks good. But it is not that simple, and this only leads to division. And these progressives are only concerned about defending the
oppressed groups as long as they keep up the narrative that they are oppressed. As soon as say a black person says this is bogus, then they are an
uncle tom who is no longer worthy of the progressives protection.

I will read it and I definitely already read that Muslim girls were raped too, in the links I posted.

But you agree it was primarily Muslim immigrants doing this, right?

And do you also agree that people were aware of the problem, but afraid to deal with it or even talk about it because they didn't want to hurt
multiculturalism or be deemed a racist?

And do you agree that many progressives still do not like to talk about this because they think it is racist to do so?

These are the issues I am outlining. Yet if groups of British natives were raping 1400 girls, the police, politicians, and media would have been all
over it, and still been using this as an example of a rape culture in Britian.

Actually here in Britain we don't really have this "rape culture" malarkey.

Yes I agree that it was predominantly Muslims according to the reports, I also agree that people kept it hidden from all walks of life, so no I don't
agree that it was the progressives.

It was all factions of government and the police commission all working together.

Which is disgusting, and exactly what they do with the elite paedos as well.

We have different problems in Britain. (Read: paedophilia hushing from top to bottom due to police and politicians)
I'd make a thread about it but it'd be too much research and time and I really just don't intend on suiciding right now.

Multiculturalism and Progressives aren't really a problem over here, yet.

But the telegraph article I linked said that leftie politicians caused this by not wanting to fight multiculturalism, and everyone was afraid to
discuss or deal with the problem because they didn't want to be thought of a racists.

This is a calling card of the progressive agenda, and why progressive over here at least will call you a racists if you bring up Rotherham or
Germany's New Years eve fiasco.

Oh and eta,

I have heard about the elites and accusations of pedophilia in the UK. Here is one thing we can all agree on, I hope that they get everyone of the
monsters that have done this.

this is such a sad difficult concept...very easy anywhere to be assaulted on purpose or not..especially with so many parents from the past not closely
giving children an ear or eye to know whats going on...then, well its so easy to lose the grasp of knowing ones body and thoughts belong to their self
and a no really means no...voices mean a bunch and its very natural to sound out what is making a human angry, english or sound body move,mints ect...

This is a good example of how lies and propaganda are being pushed by and about every possible political subgroup you can name.

All the blame toward "progressives, lefties, alt-right, etc." is all lost in a cloud of honest and dishonest stories and theories and it's just
getting worse.

Blaming any one group only helps keep the confusion rolling which is exactly the point of propaganda anyway. It's a big psyops of using media, news,
entertainment, social media, etc. as a weapon against the populace at large. It keeps us fighting. It keeps us busy. It also works to create more
of the same by getting people to react to what they think is happening around them. Which in many cases it might be happening. But with the spin and
misinformation and the rest I don't think anyone can make heads or tails of it actually. But it does effect most of us all the same and not in a
positive way.

We need to stop attacking each other though. We'll never get anywhere by continuing the fighting with each other. You will never eliminate any other
group completely. Nobody can ever win a war of ideology like we're doing. We're fighting ghosts and concepts and feeling and emotions.

Your right, we won't get anywhere by attacking each other. I think both sides and all of us are in a frustrating situation.

The leaders in politics are often deserving of these labels, a small minority of extremists on both sides, many it seems paid to create these
perceptions, seem responsible for this whole mess and division.

For example Hillary with the Deplorables thing, Trump with the Rapists thing, trying to turn what is truly a very minuscule percentage of a problem
into something bigger than it is. Very very few people could truly be considered deserving of the word deplorable, most that do are actually our
politicians and criminal elite, like for example both Hillary or Trump. Any of honestly looking at either despise either option. But we're convinced
the other option is worse.

This is on purpose. They want us to vote lesser evil, because it lowers our expectations. They purposely paint each other as the worst possible
villains, that way when we vote for who we see as lesser out of fear, and then they go onto do villainous things that harm us all, we aren't
surprised. Then they rinse and repeat.

We use terms like liberals, conservatives, ect and take the worst of them, the smallest percent of them and raise them up as if they are the norm,
when the truth is these monsters are the politicians that represent these groups, and the extremists screaming and causing problems everywhere. Both
of these two things being like the smallest fraction of the whole. This is on purpose. They push this narrative to keep us divided. They want us to
think the absolute worst of the majority of the other side, to keep us divided. The extremists and crooked politicians proudly wear these labels,
they do this because they want us painting their entire demographic by their actions.

Liberal, Conservative, Democrat, Republican, most people on both sides are regular people, they aren't particularly bigoted, they aren't particularly
anything. They're just people going about their daily lives trying to make a living. Until politics are brought up, and with them these extreme
false narratives that are being pushed most of these people get along and work side by side in harmony.

We need to stop letting them push these false narratives, most people of every color or creed are simply normal people going about their daily
business trying to get along and not harm anybody. The true harmful bigots on either side are far and few. Our real problem is not the other side of
the aisle, it's our corrupt leaders and extremist on our own sides destroying our own image, and trying to keep us divided and at war with the each
other.

It's high past time we stopped looking without and started looking within. We spend too much time protecting the worst of our respective groups, the
tiny minority of us that are causing all the problems, and too much time attacking the other side for their minority of trouble makers, each painting
the entire other side with the trouble makers brush.

It's easier to clean one's own house than it is to clean someone else's. Let's stop defending the actions of the worst of us, and start cleaning
house, and until we clean our own house, let's not be hypocrites and point at others dirty laundry.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.